Known terminal guidance missile systems have included proportional navigation with trajectory shaping that may result in a flat approach toward a target, a ballistic approach, or a combination of the two. In the flat approach trajectory, such as the direct line of sight mode or command-to-line-of-sight mode, warhead penetration is often reduced due to the shallow shot line for the warhead. In the ballistic or lofted approach to heavy armor targets, the more vulnerable and least armored top of the target is attacked. The ballistic approach attempts to dive on the target at an advantageous, steep, angle of impact, but still fails to achieve the most desired vertical or near vertical impact. Conventional anti-tank terminal homing missile guidance requires a steep impact angle to maximize lethality. This is typically obtained by maneuvering the missile into a top attack trajectory. However, it is difficult to improve performance above existing state-of-the-art, with sensor and autotracker design improvements alone.
Conventional terminal homing fire-and-forget missile systems include an on board target sensing device, such as a passive imaging sensor, which tracks the target and guides the missile to an intercept. The required accuracy of the tracking and guidance is dictated by the warhead lethality versus the intended target's capability to withstand attack. For an anti-tank terminal homing missile system with limited warhead capacity, the required three dimensional accuracy for both aimpoint selection and delivery of the warhead to that aimpoint, continues to become more difficult as tank designs are hardened against such missiles and desired ranges are extended, which compounds the accuracy of a desirable impact angle. The steeper the angle of impact, the more effective is the warhead performance.